high ping/low ping

Comments

  • WetFishDB
    1695 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    The word 'working' is somewhat subjective. Technically you can interrupt a connection and from that perspective lag switches do work (in that they interrupt the connection). And they can even be moderately effective in some games. But that's entirely different from them being effective in BF1.

    I've looked around to make sure I'm not talking utter BS, and I've seen at least one PC implementation say it's no longer effective in BF1 (obviously not sharing links as that would be against the rules). Frankly, if you tried to implement a hardware one in BF1 I suspect you'd be lucky to not get kicked from the server. And even if you did implement one and somehow weren't kicked, whether it would actually provides any tangible benefit is most definitely questionable - especially given a ping over 150-200ms (depending on server region) is enough to for the game to prevent client side hit detection.

    As I said before, I strongly suspect this whole lag switch thing is one chain of massively wrong assumptions without any actual evidence. Obviously if you do get some, feel free to PM to continue the debate. Don't post any links as I suspect that's entirely against the rules. To be honest, our conversation itself may be against the rules so I'm inviting @LOLGotYerTags in case it is (obviously exercise whatever moderation feels right dude).
  • ksdff
    62 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.
  • WetFishDB
    1695 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

  • The_BERG_366
    1871 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    why are you a god when not having download for a bit? your position will still be updated so enemies should see you normally... however you see the enemies in outdated positions meaning if they move somewhat you will get your own hits rejected (watch battlenonsense for more info on how this verification process works). also just because the server can't send you the info about you being dead doesnt mean that you are actually not dead. if youre dead on the servers reality and u send hits to him with timestamps that are significantly later than the time you died on the server, then the server will reject those hits as well (to minimise the killtrade issue).
    now please tell me what i did wrong in this description. if anything it just hurts you really....
    what theoretically could work though is manipulating your UPLOAD to increase jitter and hence sponging. (i actually know of people that used a method similar to this but i have no actual proof for it so i'm not objectively claiming its a thing).
  • ksdff
    62 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...
  • The_BERG_366
    1871 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...

    nice defence: "from what i've seen in game". maybe establish what exactly you have seen in game that makes you think that blocking your download could be advantageous?
    also i don't see any section of your provided forum page that makes any statement about battlefield specifically. of course this can work in other games but with how bf's netcode is designed this simply doesn't make any sense to do....
  • ksdff
    62 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...

    nice defence: "from what i've seen in game". maybe establish what exactly you have seen in game that makes you think that blocking your download could be advantageous?
    also i don't see any section of your provided forum page that makes any statement about battlefield specifically. of course this can work in other games but with how bf's netcode is designed this simply doesn't make any sense to do....

    I wish people would read before trying to contribute..
    I have already stated what I have seen in game.

    And please do share with everyone what makes you an expert on bf's netcode and what is/isn't possible..

    We are all presuming here yet I am the only one that has posted actual evidence that creating a virtual lag switch, that can be activated while ADS, is possible.

    From what I have seen in game (@the berk, please proof read the thread) this explains things perfectly.
    If someone else has a plausible explanation as to why it is that someone has a perfectly stable latency, which spikes with a kill, then drops to become perfectly stable again, I would like to hear it. I'm sure il hear "it's just coincidence, that person has unstable latency anyway", but again that is just presumption.
  • The_BERG_366
    1871 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    ksdff wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...

    nice defence: "from what i've seen in game". maybe establish what exactly you have seen in game that makes you think that blocking your download could be advantageous?
    also i don't see any section of your provided forum page that makes any statement about battlefield specifically. of course this can work in other games but with how bf's netcode is designed this simply doesn't make any sense to do....

    I wish people would read before trying to contribute..
    I have already stated what I have seen in game.

    And please do share with everyone what makes you an expert on bf's netcode and what is/isn't possible..

    We are all presuming here yet I am the only one that has posted actual evidence that creating a virtual lag switch, that can be activated while ADS, is possible.

    From what I have seen in game (@the berk, please proof read the thread) this explains things perfectly.
    If someone else has a plausible explanation as to why it is that someone has a perfectly stable latency, which spikes with a kill, then drops to become perfectly stable again, I would like to hear it. I'm sure il hear "it's just coincidence, that person has unstable latency anyway", but again that is just presumption.

    mmmm the irony is real. complains about me not reading stuff while most apparently you are the one that can't read what i wrote. what you have seen in game is no evidence for the theory that blocking your download will benefit your game. you know ping is dependent on both up and download as ping is the ROUNDTRIP time of an icmp packet. also if you would have read my comment then you would know that i in fact know of players using such methods and the phenomenons appearing in game are very similar to what u described even though in those cases it was rather manually as it didn't happen on every kill like u described. again i don't say that manipulating your network though cutting parts of it out at specific times doesnt work. i just say that blocking your download doesnt make sense.

    do u get it now? or do u have to claim that i can't read some more times until you do.

    also to clarify: im no expert by any means however i have basic knowledge about networking and read up a decent amount of stuff specifically regarding bf... something that you apparently didn't do. so no i don't just presume at all. the things i said can be checked by doing a little research.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6170 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ksdff wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...

    nice defence: "from what i've seen in game". maybe establish what exactly you have seen in game that makes you think that blocking your download could be advantageous?
    also i don't see any section of your provided forum page that makes any statement about battlefield specifically. of course this can work in other games but with how bf's netcode is designed this simply doesn't make any sense to do....

    I wish people would read before trying to contribute..
    I have already stated what I have seen in game.

    And please do share with everyone what makes you an expert on bf's netcode and what is/isn't possible..

    We are all presuming here yet I am the only one that has posted actual evidence that creating a virtual lag switch, that can be activated while ADS, is possible.

    From what I have seen in game (@the berk, please proof read the thread) this explains things perfectly.
    If someone else has a plausible explanation as to why it is that someone has a perfectly stable latency, which spikes with a kill, then drops to become perfectly stable again, I would like to hear it. I'm sure il hear "it's just coincidence, that person has unstable latency anyway", but again that is just presumption.

    mmmm the irony is real. complains about me not reading stuff while most apparently you are the one that can't read what i wrote. what you have seen in game is no evidence for the theory that blocking your download will benefit your game. you know ping is dependent on both up and download as ping is the ROUNDTRIP time of an icmp packet. also if you would have read my comment then you would know that i in fact know of players using such methods and the phenomenons appearing in game are very similar to what u described even though in those cases it was rather manually as it didn't happen on every kill like u described. again i don't say that manipulating your network though cutting parts of it out at specific times doesnt work. i just say that blocking your download doesnt make sense.

    do u get it now? or do u have to claim that i can't read some more times until you do.

    also to clarify: im no expert by any means however i have basic knowledge about networking and read up a decent amount of stuff specifically regarding bf... something that you apparently didn't do. so no i don't just presume at all. the things i said can be checked by doing a little research.

    But but..you're not reading.
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case.

    First you make it sound like FACT...then you follow up with this. And it was at this point where your claims and knowledge fall apart.
  • ksdff
    62 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...

    nice defence: "from what i've seen in game". maybe establish what exactly you have seen in game that makes you think that blocking your download could be advantageous?
    also i don't see any section of your provided forum page that makes any statement about battlefield specifically. of course this can work in other games but with how bf's netcode is designed this simply doesn't make any sense to do....

    I wish people would read before trying to contribute..
    I have already stated what I have seen in game.

    And please do share with everyone what makes you an expert on bf's netcode and what is/isn't possible..

    We are all presuming here yet I am the only one that has posted actual evidence that creating a virtual lag switch, that can be activated while ADS, is possible.

    From what I have seen in game (@the berk, please proof read the thread) this explains things perfectly.
    If someone else has a plausible explanation as to why it is that someone has a perfectly stable latency, which spikes with a kill, then drops to become perfectly stable again, I would like to hear it. I'm sure il hear "it's just coincidence, that person has unstable latency anyway", but again that is just presumption.

    mmmm the irony is real. complains about me not reading stuff while most apparently you are the one that can't read what i wrote. what you have seen in game is no evidence for the theory that blocking your download will benefit your game. you know ping is dependent on both up and download as ping is the ROUNDTRIP time of an icmp packet. also if you would have read my comment then you would know that i in fact know of players using such methods and the phenomenons appearing in game are very similar to what u described even though in those cases it was rather manually as it didn't happen on every kill like u described. again i don't say that manipulating your network though cutting parts of it out at specific times doesnt work. i just say that blocking your download doesnt make sense.

    do u get it now? or do u have to claim that i can't read some more times until you do.

    also to clarify: im no expert by any means however i have basic knowledge about networking and read up a decent amount of stuff specifically regarding bf... something that you apparently didn't do. so no i don't just presume at all. the things i said can be checked by doing a little research.

    But but..you're not reading.
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case.

    First you make it sound like FACT...then you follow up with this. And it was at this point where your claims and knowledge fall apart.

    What are you on about? Jeez
    I have shown you evidence, I have connected said evidence to particular things i have seen in game, what more do you want?
    Get a grip mate, you don't know everything that happens in the game.
    All you have given me back is presumptions and absolutely ZERO evidence that it is impossible to do these things.

    @ the berk.. upload/download whatever, that lag switch can do both. Your oh mighty wisdom didn't quite grasp that did it.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6170 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...

    nice defence: "from what i've seen in game". maybe establish what exactly you have seen in game that makes you think that blocking your download could be advantageous?
    also i don't see any section of your provided forum page that makes any statement about battlefield specifically. of course this can work in other games but with how bf's netcode is designed this simply doesn't make any sense to do....

    I wish people would read before trying to contribute..
    I have already stated what I have seen in game.

    And please do share with everyone what makes you an expert on bf's netcode and what is/isn't possible..

    We are all presuming here yet I am the only one that has posted actual evidence that creating a virtual lag switch, that can be activated while ADS, is possible.

    From what I have seen in game (@the berk, please proof read the thread) this explains things perfectly.
    If someone else has a plausible explanation as to why it is that someone has a perfectly stable latency, which spikes with a kill, then drops to become perfectly stable again, I would like to hear it. I'm sure il hear "it's just coincidence, that person has unstable latency anyway", but again that is just presumption.

    mmmm the irony is real. complains about me not reading stuff while most apparently you are the one that can't read what i wrote. what you have seen in game is no evidence for the theory that blocking your download will benefit your game. you know ping is dependent on both up and download as ping is the ROUNDTRIP time of an icmp packet. also if you would have read my comment then you would know that i in fact know of players using such methods and the phenomenons appearing in game are very similar to what u described even though in those cases it was rather manually as it didn't happen on every kill like u described. again i don't say that manipulating your network though cutting parts of it out at specific times doesnt work. i just say that blocking your download doesnt make sense.

    do u get it now? or do u have to claim that i can't read some more times until you do.

    also to clarify: im no expert by any means however i have basic knowledge about networking and read up a decent amount of stuff specifically regarding bf... something that you apparently didn't do. so no i don't just presume at all. the things i said can be checked by doing a little research.

    But but..you're not reading.
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case.

    First you make it sound like FACT...then you follow up with this. And it was at this point where your claims and knowledge fall apart.

    What are you on about? Jeez
    I have shown you evidence, I have connected said evidence to particular things i have seen in game, what more do you want?
    Get a grip mate, you don't know everything that happens in the game.
    All you have given me back is presumptions and absolutely ZERO evidence that it is impossible to do these things.

    @ the berk.. upload/download whatever, that lag switch can do both. Your oh mighty wisdom didn't quite grasp that did it.

    Again it wont work with bF1. As stated before you update your position to the server. If you stop that transmission the server doesnt say "oh no input I will just ignore what will happen until I get an input". Instead the client will shoot you and register a hit...server will look and compare to its data on where you are and what you are doing....then make a decision on if you're dead or not.

    This is not P2P. This is a hybrid of client side and server side detection to help overcome people doing this.

    So you can make claims all you want but that doesn't make them true.

    As stated before a developer from dice back in 2016 specifically stated that they made sure to write code in BF to prevent lag switches to work....end of story.
  • digga11
    707 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    People aren’t talking about lag switches they are talking about inducing high ping.

    Then obviously you haven't read what he posted....both times.

    Think you need to dig a bit deeper on the ping variation issue that’s going around. It’s not a lag switch that normally only works if your hosting the game but something else.
  • The_BERG_366
    1871 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case. That's just my presumption, just like you are presuming the effects would be negative.
    A lot of effort to go to just to be a corpse...

    nice defence: "from what i've seen in game". maybe establish what exactly you have seen in game that makes you think that blocking your download could be advantageous?
    also i don't see any section of your provided forum page that makes any statement about battlefield specifically. of course this can work in other games but with how bf's netcode is designed this simply doesn't make any sense to do....

    I wish people would read before trying to contribute..
    I have already stated what I have seen in game.

    And please do share with everyone what makes you an expert on bf's netcode and what is/isn't possible..

    We are all presuming here yet I am the only one that has posted actual evidence that creating a virtual lag switch, that can be activated while ADS, is possible.

    From what I have seen in game (@the berk, please proof read the thread) this explains things perfectly.
    If someone else has a plausible explanation as to why it is that someone has a perfectly stable latency, which spikes with a kill, then drops to become perfectly stable again, I would like to hear it. I'm sure il hear "it's just coincidence, that person has unstable latency anyway", but again that is just presumption.

    mmmm the irony is real. complains about me not reading stuff while most apparently you are the one that can't read what i wrote. what you have seen in game is no evidence for the theory that blocking your download will benefit your game. you know ping is dependent on both up and download as ping is the ROUNDTRIP time of an icmp packet. also if you would have read my comment then you would know that i in fact know of players using such methods and the phenomenons appearing in game are very similar to what u described even though in those cases it was rather manually as it didn't happen on every kill like u described. again i don't say that manipulating your network though cutting parts of it out at specific times doesnt work. i just say that blocking your download doesnt make sense.

    do u get it now? or do u have to claim that i can't read some more times until you do.

    also to clarify: im no expert by any means however i have basic knowledge about networking and read up a decent amount of stuff specifically regarding bf... something that you apparently didn't do. so no i don't just presume at all. the things i said can be checked by doing a little research.

    But but..you're not reading.
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    Did you read any of that link?

    Yes I did along with the link inside of it that was a little dated.

    The advice given on that site on how to create an ADS lag switch was posted Feb 18. Not that dated.
    If you read it all, which I'm sure you didn't, some know it all (A bit like you and wetfish) says exactly the same as you
    (lag switches don't work anymore) and goes on to be proven wrong.
    Lag switches DO work, as long as it is only used for seconds at a time before disconnecting.

    Actually I said the link inside the thread you linked was dated.

    And no in BF1 a lag switch doesnt work. It has been already talked in many other threads and even the developers went through and talked about how it wont work.

    Just because someone says it works doesnt make it truth.

    A physical lag switch doesnt work because it cuts out for to long and disconnects. It would be Impractical to use it in game for a few seconds at a time because you would have to physically keep switching it on/off.

    Something tells me you still didn't read the link properly, because it details a virtual lag switch that temporarily cuts out your download connection. As long as it's activated for a only a few seconds at a time you won't be disconnected but will have a brief, but huge, latency spike.
    For those few seconds you are god.

    You assume you are god, but you have no idea if it would actually work out that way.

    For example... if you managed to get something to work and you temporary block connection, then it's entirely possible that server side arbitration will fail on your attempted kills. In case you didn't know, every hit and kill claim in BF1 is simulated on the server to arbitrate if it's legit. I'm guessing the server would have received position updates from everyone else, so when it runs the simulation it'll say they weren't were you claimed the hit. Never mind breaching the latency limit may then block client side hit detection anyway, meaning you'd have to hit them where the server sees them, not where your client does - restricting you more towards spammy guns in close rage and just spraying and praying. Hardly god like.

    And in a straight on gunfight the server will receive the enemy's kill claim as quick as their connection allows, potentially arbitrate it as correct and credit them with the kill and you the death. When your connection resumes and attempts to send the kill, it'll fail as it'll already registered you as dead and you'll just insta-die (potentially without any damage on the enemy).

    Rather than a god, you could just as easily be a corpse.

    From what iv seen in game, I don't think that is the case.

    First you make it sound like FACT...then you follow up with this. And it was at this point where your claims and knowledge fall apart.

    What are you on about? Jeez
    I have shown you evidence, I have connected said evidence to particular things i have seen in game, what more do you want?
    Get a grip mate, you don't know everything that happens in the game.
    All you have given me back is presumptions and absolutely ZERO evidence that it is impossible to do these things.

    @ the berk.. upload/download whatever, that lag switch can do both. Your oh mighty wisdom didn't quite grasp that did it.

    what are u even talking about. please just understand what i wrote instead of reading what u want to read. i never even talked about your software lagswitch and what it can and can not do. AGAIN and for the last time: all i said is that it doesnt make sense to cut off your download. thats it. is your brain capable of understanding that ffs? or do i have to bash it into your head with a sledgehammer.

    also the fact that u claimed these things about download and that you don't seem to care now that i pointed that out just shows how much you understand of the matter. it seems to me that u just really like to get vocal with complaints about all sorts of cheating. hence seeing such a post just fits your agenda so you just post without even thinking about it.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6170 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    People aren’t talking about lag switches they are talking about inducing high ping.

    Then obviously you haven't read what he posted....both times.

    Think you need to dig a bit deeper on the ping variation issue that’s going around. It’s not a lag switch that normally only works if your hosting the game but something else.

    Of course it's a special BF lag switch.

    As stated before blocking traffic is not going to help. Varying your pipe may cause some variations that MAY make things squirrely but this is not consistent. Again as stated before mischkag did address this in the past and stated how he helped prevent these exploits.
  • digga11
    707 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    People aren’t talking about lag switches they are talking about inducing high ping.

    Then obviously you haven't read what he posted....both times.

    Think you need to dig a bit deeper on the ping variation issue that’s going around. It’s not a lag switch that normally only works if your hosting the game but something else.

    Of course it's a special BF lag switch.

    As stated before blocking traffic is not going to help. Varying your pipe may cause some variations that MAY make things squirrely but this is not consistent. Again as stated before mischkag did address this in the past and stated how he helped prevent these exploits.

    As i told you before v box we aren’t talking about blocking traffic. And as we all know exploiters and cheaters are always looking for new ways. There seems to be a few new ways of ping exploitation and not just for bf1.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6170 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    People aren’t talking about lag switches they are talking about inducing high ping.

    Then obviously you haven't read what he posted....both times.

    Think you need to dig a bit deeper on the ping variation issue that’s going around. It’s not a lag switch that normally only works if your hosting the game but something else.

    Of course it's a special BF lag switch.

    As stated before blocking traffic is not going to help. Varying your pipe may cause some variations that MAY make things squirrely but this is not consistent. Again as stated before mischkag did address this in the past and stated how he helped prevent these exploits.

    As i told you before v box we aren’t talking about blocking traffic. And as we all know exploiters and cheaters are always looking for new ways. There seems to be a few new ways of ping exploitation and not just for bf1.

    Sure...its just another thing that many will believe is what killed them instead of their gameplay. It's very funny how people are very quick to believe someones word on these things but very reluctant to doubt and challenge heresay.
  • fisknyllet17
    1599 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I never let logic and reason get in the way of me being right.
  • digga11
    707 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    People aren’t talking about lag switches they are talking about inducing high ping.

    Then obviously you haven't read what he posted....both times.

    Think you need to dig a bit deeper on the ping variation issue that’s going around. It’s not a lag switch that normally only works if your hosting the game but something else.

    Of course it's a special BF lag switch.

    As stated before blocking traffic is not going to help. Varying your pipe may cause some variations that MAY make things squirrely but this is not consistent. Again as stated before mischkag did address this in the past and stated how he helped prevent these exploits.

    As i told you before v box we aren’t talking about blocking traffic. And as we all know exploiters and cheaters are always looking for new ways. There seems to be a few new ways of ping exploitation and not just for bf1.

    Sure...its just another thing that many will believe is what killed them instead of their gameplay. It's very funny how people are very quick to believe someones word on these things but very reluctant to doubt and challenge heresay.[/quote

    No it’s just another way of people trying to cheat and it not just about bf1 by any means and if it catches on some things will have to change. But don’t let me distract you from outputting smart remarks about anything you disagree about.
  • VBALL_MVP
    6170 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    People aren’t talking about lag switches they are talking about inducing high ping.

    Then obviously you haven't read what he posted....both times.

    Think you need to dig a bit deeper on the ping variation issue that’s going around. It’s not a lag switch that normally only works if your hosting the game but something else.

    Of course it's a special BF lag switch.

    As stated before blocking traffic is not going to help. Varying your pipe may cause some variations that MAY make things squirrely but this is not consistent. Again as stated before mischkag did address this in the past and stated how he helped prevent these exploits.

    As i told you before v box we aren’t talking about blocking traffic. And as we all know exploiters and cheaters are always looking for new ways. There seems to be a few new ways of ping exploitation and not just for bf1.

    Sure...its just another thing that many will believe is what killed them instead of their gameplay. It's very funny how people are very quick to believe someones word on these things but very reluctant to doubt and challenge heresay.[/quote

    No it’s just another way of people trying to cheat and it not just about bf1 by any means and if it catches on some things will have to change. But don’t let me distract you from outputting smart remarks about anything you disagree about.

    Its not smart remarks, it's that someone says something and all of the sudden he has to be true.

    Just like all the other hackusations and how everyone is a MnK user. Just add lag switchers to the wall.

    He must have been using a lag switch too:
    https://www.vg247.com/2018/10/24/battlefield-5-dev-banned-black-ops-4-too-good/amp/
    Post edited by VBALL_MVP on
  • ackers75
    1407 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    digga11 wrote: »
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    ksdff wrote: »
    thecajun wrote: »
    KingRofty wrote: »
    It's all about your ping after this latest patch. Impossible to win gunfights against low ping players now. No skill required anymore, a ping of 14 or 20 is all the skill you need.

    What are smoking? Every match I play my ping is 14-20 and usually hardly fluctuates but tons of bullet sponge rubber banding laggy connections with other players making my bullets rarely count . I can't count the number of times laggy players soak up bullets from behind then I die and their character turns around shooting after I die. Battlefield servers have always benefited laggers, that's why I've seen people purposely join foreign servers to lag their way to a win. Whenever I end up in a server where my ping is above 100 I always do better, but I try to play in my region so not to have lag advantage, I'll leave that up to the others to do if that's what they think they need to be good at a GAME. Just a few minutes ago I was watching the scoreboard ping and had another player running at 70-90s ping but right before he would get a recorded kill his ping would go anywhere from 300-900. So keep thinking that low ping is an advantage now, LMAO. If have low ping is an advantage now then maybe you should play on the closest to you or maybe people should stop leeching others wifi signals also. And even if it is true then tough deal with it, I've dealt with years of people lagging on purpose just to boost their stats.Why should I suffer for actually having good internet that I pay for?

    I mentioned this in another thread and I'm seeing it more and more lately. The answer is cronusmax and lag switch. There is a way to activate a temporary lag switch when ADS which can be programmed with the cronus.
    Once the lag switch is activated it will seem like all his/her bullets will hit you in 1 and barely any of your bullets will touch them.
    I just witnessed this very thing on verdun heights operations. I got 1 shot killed multiple times by the same guy with the auto loading extended. He went 116-16.
    I watched his ping for a few minutes and shore enough, ping stable at around 50, would shoot up to 150 plus and a kill appeared, then drop down to become stable. With every spike came a kill.

    I sure do hope that is just plain BS as a result of a chain of wild assumptions.

    The cronusmax is a device which allows you to program macros that simulate controller key presses. It cannot interface with the router or lag switches as far as I can see. Is there evidence to indicate it can interact with lag switches?

    And even if it did, whilst iit might bundle damage to you a little perhaps if they activated on ADS, but that would do nothing to prevent them from being hit at the same time. They can't exactly run when ADS and so their position updates would be minimal, meaning a sitting duck for anyone shooting them when they are ADS etc as the server would think they are stationary. And, if their ping goes too high they'd have to lead their shots (as there is no client side hit detection above a certain threshold) which would mean they have to guess where the server thinks people are rather than shooting at what they see on their screen. Overall I expect the experience would be trash. Is there any evidence of lag switches being effective in BF1?

    Or is this you just watching something you couldn't explain, so coming up with a guess as to what was happening? Getting a KD of 10 on Ops isn't all that hard I suspect.

    Here it is again in case you missed it last time...

    https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/lag-switches-and-finding-glitches.1705409/

    I imagine the experience would be trash if you had constantly bad lag and were rubber banding etc. To have controlled lag however that doesn't affect your general movement would definitely be an advantage.

    Ops is harder then you think btw. Conquest is so open that you can easily flank and avoid any action.
    Ops is all out war, everything the game has to throw at you is squished into a small portion of a map. It takes way more skill to survive imo.

    Lag switches don't work on BF1.

    People aren’t talking about lag switches they are talking about inducing high ping.

    Then obviously you haven't read what he posted....both times.

    Think you need to dig a bit deeper on the ping variation issue that’s going around. It’s not a lag switch that normally only works if your hosting the game but something else.

    Of course it's a special BF lag switch.

    As stated before blocking traffic is not going to help. Varying your pipe may cause some variations that MAY make things squirrely but this is not consistent. Again as stated before mischkag did address this in the past and stated how he helped prevent these exploits.

    As i told you before v box we aren’t talking about blocking traffic. And as we all know exploiters and cheaters are always looking for new ways. There seems to be a few new ways of ping exploitation and not just for bf1.

    Sure...its just another thing that many will believe is what killed them instead of their gameplay. It's very funny how people are very quick to believe someones word on these things but very reluctant to doubt and challenge heresay.[/quote

    No it’s just another way of people trying to cheat and it not just about bf1 by any means and if it catches on some things will have to change. But don’t let me distract you from outputting smart remarks about anything you disagree about.

    Its not smart remarks, it's that someone says something and all of the sudden he has to be true.

    Just like all the other hackusations and how everyone is a MnK user. Just add lag switchers to the wall.

    He must have been using a lag switch too:
    https://www.vg247.com/2018/10/24/battlefield-5-dev-banned-black-ops-4-too-good/amp/


    Just because he is a dev does that make him immune from cheating?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!